Further odds on whether or not Mrs. Cooper turns out to be:
A) Alan's "Biological Mother"
B) Alan's "Step Mother"
C) Alan's "Court-Appointed Guardian",
D) Alan's "Case Worker"
F) President of AF Holdings.
G) All of the above, depending on the filing.
The popularity of "magicians" never ceases to amaze me because I'm not one who WANTS to be fooled: I want to see and understand reality. It's easy to fool someone. Just ask any three-card monte dealer on the sidewalk to demonstrate that YOU too can be fooled. But fantasy is big business because most people have some sort of primitive need to believe in "magic" -- and deny cold hard reality and pesky immutable laws.
So forget Teller's trick, kids. It's JUST a trick.
You have obviously never seen Penn and Teller's act, because they preach at length about this very subject. But hey, since when has being ignorant about a subject stopped you from ranting and raving like a lunatic for all to see?
I am distrustful of third party software that wants your Amazon login info to remove the DRM from the stuff you've bought there. (Unless you know of another way, in which case I'd be VERY interested to know about it.)
The government was trying to stifle political speech about a politician close to an election. Opponents of Citizens United must take the opposite side and argue that the government can shut down such political speech.
I mean, I'm not really a fan of the NYT, for example, but I certainly don't think it's the government's job to tell them what they can and cannot print about a politician. Do you?
Without getting into the relative merit of the apps in question: Google is not the government, and may choose what content it allows on its property (the app store). Their final decision one way or the other does not even touch the issue of free speech.
I highly doubt, for example, that your commitment to free speech would extend to letting the KKK hold a cross-burning rally on your front lawn. Your refusal to do so would likewise not be "censorship" or "against free speech".
Now, if they petitioned the government to force Google to remove the apps, or if you petitioned to government to prevent the KKK from holding rallies . . .
I agree, actually, but probably not in the direction you expect.
The 2nd amendment was written so that citizens would have the tools they needed to fight off government intrusion (foreign or domestic), and as such included any and all arms normally carried by an infantry soldier.
So if we want to keep up with technological progress, we need to re-legalize the production and sale of automatic weapons in order to comply with the spirit of the 2nd.
Left/right and Republican/Democrat are false dichotomies. There is only one party: the big government party.
And why are laws passed by representative democracies inherently more legitimate than direct democracies? Why do you believe that the morality of an action depends on whether more than 50% of some group of people vote on it, regardless of who that group is?